Power analysis for random-effects meta-analysis

Research Synthesis Methods

Volumn 8, Issue 3, 2017, Pages 290-302

  Jackson, Dan ^a   Turner, Rebecca ^a  

^a MRC BIOSTATISTICS UNIT   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

cochrane; empirical evaluation; power calculations; random effects meta analysis

Indexed keywords

FACTUAL DATABASE; HUMAN; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); STATISTICAL BIAS; STATISTICAL MODEL;

BIAS; DATABASES, FACTUAL; HUMANS; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; MODELS, STATISTICAL;

EID: 85017336537     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17592887     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1240     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. 2011. http://handbook.cochrane.org/ [accessed March 7, 2017]
2. Borenstein M, Hedges LV, Higgins JPT, Rothstein HR. Introduction to Meta-Analysis. Chichester, UK: Wiley; 2009.
3. Polanin JR, Pigott TD. The use of meta-analytic statistical signifiance testing. Res Syn Meth. 2015;6:63–73.
4. Higgins JPT, Whitehead A, Simmonds M. Sequential methods for random-effects meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2011;30:903–921.
5. Roloff V, Higgins JPT, Sutton AJ. Planning future studies based on the conditional power of a meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2013;32:11–24.
6. Turner RM, Bird SM, Higgins JPT. The impact of study size on meta-analyses: examination of underpowered studies in Cochrane reviews. Plos One. 2011;8:e59202.
7. Nikolakopoulou A, Mavridis A, Salanti G. Using conditional power of network meta-analysis (NMA) to inform the design of future clinical trials. Biometrical J. 2014;56:973–990.
8. Nikolakopoulou A, Mavridis A, Salanti G. Planning future studies based on the precision of network meta-analysis results. Stat Med. 2015;35:978–1000.
9. Ades AE, Lu G, Higgins JP. The interpretation of random-effects meta-analysis in decision models. Med Decis Making. 2005;25:646–654.
10. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Controlled Clin Trials. 1986;7:177–188.
11. Higgins JPT, Thompson SG, Spiegelhalter DJ. A re-evaluation of random-effects meta-analysis. J Royal Stat Soc Series A. 2009:137–159.
12. Riley RD, Higgins JPT, Deeks JJ. Interpretation of random effects meta-analyses. British Med J. 2011;342:964–967.
13. Cohn LD, Becker BJ. How Meta-Analysis Increases Statistical Power. Psychological Methods. 2003;8:243–253.
14. Valentine JC, Pigott TD, Rothstein HR. How many studies do you need? A primer on statistical power for meta-analysis. J Educational Behav Stat. 2010;35:215–247.
15. Hedges LV, Pigott TD. The power of statistical tests in meta-analysis. Psychological Methods. 2001;6:203–217.
16. Hoenig JM, Heisey DM. The abuse of power: The pervasive fallacy of power calculations for data analysis. Amer Stat. 2001;55:19–24.
17. Matthews DE, Farwell VT. Using and Understanding Medical Statistics. London, UK: Karger; 2015.
18. Biggerstaff BJ, Jackson D. The exact distribution of Cochran's heterogeneity statistic in one-way random effects meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2008;27:6093–6110.
19. Jackson D. Confidence intervals for the between-study variance in random effects meta-analysis using generalised Cochran heterogeneity statistics. Res Syn Meth. 2013;4:220–229.
20. Veroniki AA, Jackson D, Viechtbauer W, Bender R, Bowden J, Knapp G, Kuss O, Higgins JPT, Langan D, Salanti G. Methods to estimate the between-study variance and its uncertainty in meta-analysis. Res Syn Meth. 2015;7:55–79.
21. Higgins JPT, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2002;21:1539–1558.
22. Davey J, Turner RM, Clarke MJ, Higgins JPT. Characteristics of meta-analyses and their component studies in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews: a cross-sectional, descriptive analysis. BMC Med Res Method. 2011;11:160.
23. Hoaglin DC. Misunderstandings about Q and ‘Cochran's Q test’ in meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2016;16:485–495.
24. Shuster JJ, Walker MA. Low-event-rate meta-analyses of clinical trials: implementing good practices. Stat Med. 2016;35:2467–2478.
25. Jackson D, Bowden J. A re-evaluation of the 'quantile approximation method' for random effects meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2009;28:338–348.
26. Thorlund K, Imberger G, Walsh M, Chu R, Gluud C, Wetterslev J, Guyatt G, Devereaux PJ, Thabane L. The number of patients and events required to limit the risk of overestimation of intervention effects in meta-analysis - a simulation study. Plos One. 2011;6:e25491.
27. Wetterslev J, Thorlund K, Brok J, Gluud C. Trial sequential analysis may establish when firm evidence is reached in cumulative meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61:64–75.
28. Hartung J, Knapp G. A refined method for the meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials with binary outcome. Stat Med. 2001;20:3875–3889.
29. Noma H. Confidence intervals for a random-effects meta-analysis based on Bartlett-type corrections. Stat Med. 2001;30:3304–3312.
30. Sidik K, Jonkman JN. Authors reply. Stat Med. 2004;23:159–162.
31. Simmonds MC, Higgins JP. A general framework for the use of logistic regression models in meta-analysis. Stat Methods Med Res. 2016;25:2858–2877.
32. Stijnen T, Hamza TH, Ozdemir P. Random effects meta-analysis of event outcome in the framework of the generalized linear mixed model with applications in sparse data. Stat Med. 2010;29:3046–3067.